Quotes and Wisdom
from the Top of the Mind™
from the Top of the Mind™
Disagreement
"A discussion becomes destructive when it begins to generate more heat than light."
"More heat than light"... this phrase caught my eye as I was reading M. Scott Peck's new book, "Golf and the Spirit." The reason I found this passage especially quotable is that it gives us a barometer by which we can measure the degree to which our discussions are truly serving us. For example, it's probably fair to say that as we look at our interactions on a daily basis, many of us may find ourselves generating much more "heat" than we would like. Someone says something with which we disagree, and we immediately begin to counter their opinion (either internally or externally). This then quickly turns into a debate about "who's right" in which no one feels particularly "enlightened," and thus "heat" is the primary byproduct. How's this working for you? :-) Think this might be good information about whether we want to continue to respond this way? :-)
Now, just to be clear, I'm certainly not saying that differences of opinion in and of themselves are problematic. It all depends on the purpose of the discussion. If we are willing to engage those with whom we have a difference of opinion with the purpose of understanding or enlightenment, then these sort of discussions can offer many valuable gifts in the form of new information and perspective. We can see the world through another's eyes, and decide if there are elements of this new view that we find valuable, and thus may want to incorporate into our own perspective on the world or not, as the case may be. If we do find the other's perspective valuable, we can thank them for their willingness to share it with us. If not, we can allow them to believe whatever they wish, knowing that life will eventually give them (or us) very good information about how holding onto these beliefs serves the "holder."
Conversely, when the purpose of a discussion is light versus just heat, then we can offer our perspective to another without needing them to agree with us. If they find what we have to say "enlightening," then great. If not, we can still hold on to our beliefs and "agree to disagree." You see, a "disagreement" is only problematic when there is a lack of agreement about the purpose of the conversation. When the purpose is convincing another that we are right and they are wrong, then heat and friction are the likely result. However, when the agreed-upon purpose of the discussion is light or enlightenment, then differences of opinion become new and potentially fascinating patterns of thought that we can look forward to exploring, and even mining for their value. If, based upon our willingness to be purposeful, we strike gold (in the form of new information or a new perspective), then everyone is the richer for the effort. If not, then we can still feel good about our willingness to keep digging, and know that if we persist in mining for the truth, we will be successful.
The challenge is awareness. We have to be sure that the cave or shaft we are exploring has the potential to yield the gold we seek. This means that we need to become very purposeful in choosing when and where we engage others in discussion, and make sure that at least we are clear about our real purpose for following that thread or vein. Further, we might want to make sure that we all agree that light versus heat is our principal reason for having the discussion, so that we can use this distinction as a monitor for what we say, and how we say it. This doesn't mean that a discussion should have no heat. In fact, many forms of heat give off light as well. The quote states that "A discussion becomes destructive when it begins to generate more heat than light" Here's to a future of discussions that warm and enlighten all concerned! :-)
Now, just to be clear, I'm certainly not saying that differences of opinion in and of themselves are problematic. It all depends on the purpose of the discussion. If we are willing to engage those with whom we have a difference of opinion with the purpose of understanding or enlightenment, then these sort of discussions can offer many valuable gifts in the form of new information and perspective. We can see the world through another's eyes, and decide if there are elements of this new view that we find valuable, and thus may want to incorporate into our own perspective on the world or not, as the case may be. If we do find the other's perspective valuable, we can thank them for their willingness to share it with us. If not, we can allow them to believe whatever they wish, knowing that life will eventually give them (or us) very good information about how holding onto these beliefs serves the "holder."
Conversely, when the purpose of a discussion is light versus just heat, then we can offer our perspective to another without needing them to agree with us. If they find what we have to say "enlightening," then great. If not, we can still hold on to our beliefs and "agree to disagree." You see, a "disagreement" is only problematic when there is a lack of agreement about the purpose of the conversation. When the purpose is convincing another that we are right and they are wrong, then heat and friction are the likely result. However, when the agreed-upon purpose of the discussion is light or enlightenment, then differences of opinion become new and potentially fascinating patterns of thought that we can look forward to exploring, and even mining for their value. If, based upon our willingness to be purposeful, we strike gold (in the form of new information or a new perspective), then everyone is the richer for the effort. If not, then we can still feel good about our willingness to keep digging, and know that if we persist in mining for the truth, we will be successful.
The challenge is awareness. We have to be sure that the cave or shaft we are exploring has the potential to yield the gold we seek. This means that we need to become very purposeful in choosing when and where we engage others in discussion, and make sure that at least we are clear about our real purpose for following that thread or vein. Further, we might want to make sure that we all agree that light versus heat is our principal reason for having the discussion, so that we can use this distinction as a monitor for what we say, and how we say it. This doesn't mean that a discussion should have no heat. In fact, many forms of heat give off light as well. The quote states that "A discussion becomes destructive when it begins to generate more heat than light" Here's to a future of discussions that warm and enlighten all concerned! :-)
Take care and God bless, Dr. Bill